Disposed

M/S Tribal Cafe v. Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2024WP/624/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A cafe sought directions that police not interfere with its hookah/smoking facility and that no licence be required for tobacco-only hookah use. The court found the issue covered by a co-ordinate bench decision and disposed of the petition on the same terms.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed on the same terms as the co-ordinate bench judgment in W.P.No.30673/2019; respondents directed accordingly.

M/S Tribal Cafe Vs Government of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:904 WP No. 624 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 624 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M/S TRIBAL CAFE A PROPRIETORSHIP REP BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR, SRI. GIRISH N. NO.291, KUDUWATTHI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562103

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR C., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001

¶13

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANAKANURU, CHIKKABALLAPUR-562103

¶14

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPUR-562103

¶15

INSPECTOR OF POLICE NANDI GRAMA POLICE STATION BENGALURU ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRCIT-562103

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:904 WP No. 624 of 2024

¶18

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER NANDI GRAMA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT-562103

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INTERFERENCE WITH RUNNING OF THE BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S TRIBAL CAFE, SITUATED AT NO.291, KUDAVATHI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA, CHIKKABALLAPURA-562103, PROVIDING HOOKAH/SMOKING FACILITY AND RUNNING THE RESTAURANT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER THE GUISE OF INSPECTION, RAIDS AND HARASS THE PETITIONER AT REGULAR AND PERIODICAL INTERVALS WITHOUT ANY NOTICE TO THE PETITIONER; ALTERNATIVELY, HOLD THAT NO LICENSE IS REQUIRED FOR USE OF HOOKAH SMOKING ZONE FOR PROVIDING SMOKING TOBACCO WITHOUT ANY OTHER SUBSTANCE.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard Sri. Chandrashekar C., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Manjunath K., the learned HCGP appearing for the respondents.

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court, seeking for the

¶26

following prayers:

¶27

"(i) Directing the Respondents not to interference with the running of the business under the name and

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:904 WP No. 624 of 2024

¶30

style of ' M/s TRIBAL CAFE', situated at No.No.291, Kuduvathi Village, Nandi Hobli, Chikkaballapura, Chikkaballapura - 562103, providing hookah/smoking facility and running the restaurant, in accordance with law, under the guise of inspection, raids and harass the petitioner at regular and periodical intervals without any notice to the petitioner.

¶31

(ii) Alternatively, hold that no license is requires for use of Hookah smoking zone for providing smoking tobacco without any other substance.

¶32

(iii) pass any such other order or direction, as may be deemed fit in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, equity and law. "

¶33

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶34

would submit that the issue in the lis stands covered by the

¶35

judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench in the case of

¶36

MR. M.B. SHIVAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND

¶37

OTHERS.¹ , the Co-ordinate Bench has held as follows:

¶38

"Sri Govindaraj K. Joisa, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶39

Sri B.Balakrishna, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶40

2. The matter is taken up for hearing with the consent of the parties. It is heard finally.

¶41

3. Petitioner is before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to respondents not to interfere with the lawful activities carried on by the petitioner. Petitioner is said to be running a restaurant wherein the customers are permitted to smoke hooka and respondents are

¶42

1 W.P.No.30673/2019 disposed on 24.07.2019

¶43

¶44

NC: 2024:KHC:904 WP No. 624 of 2024

¶45

alleged to have interfered with the business of petitioner. Hence, petitioner is before this Court for issue of writ of mandamus to the respondents not to interfere with his business.

¶46

4. Under similar circumstances, Coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 27.02.2017 passed in W.P.No.8140/2017 had considered these aspects and after taking note of the order passed in W.P.No.14226/2015 on 03.09.2015 had held as under:

¶47

“4. If that be the position, the use of the instrument known as Hooka cannot be prohibited as long as such smoking is of Tobacco through the Hooka and no other prohibited substance is used. Therefore, if the said Hooka is used for any other illegal purpose, certainly the law enforcing authorities including the jurisdictional police would be entitled to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶48

5. Therefore, the only direction that is required to be issued in the instant petition to the respondents is not to insist upon the petitioner to obtain licence for the use of Hooka in the smoking zone provided by the petitioner in their premises, if such facility is provided only for smoking Tobacco through Hooka. However, if any credible information is received and in the process of monitoring, if any illegal activity is found including use of any banned substance, certainly the respondents or such other law enforcing authorities would be entitled to take action in accordance with law.”

¶49

In that view of the matter, petitioner would be entitled for similar relief.

¶50

5. At this juncture, learned Government Advocate would submit that alleged customers of the petitioner-restaurant under the guise of smoking hooka are likely to indulge in activities, which are unlawful and as such, police authorities should be permitted to keep a check and also smoking having been prohibited in public places, exclusive area for smoking hooka is to be earmarked by the petitioner in the business premises,

¶51

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:904 WP No. 624 of 2024

¶52

where the hotel being run and as such, he prays for additional condition also being imposed on petitioner.

¶53

6. Said contention deserves to be accepted for the simple reason that under the guise of smoking hooka, customers at the petitioner-restaurant cannot be allowed to use ganja marijuana, etc. That apart, smoking of hooka should not cause inconvenience to other customers since smoking having been prohibited in public places, an exclusive area with separate enclosure requires to be reserved for hooka bar. Hence, in addition to the conditions noted hereinabove an additional condition requires to be imposed on the petitioner and it shall be as under:

¶54

(a) Petitioner shall earmark exclusively a separate area/place(s) with appropriate enclosure in the hotel premise and necessarily after obtaining licence for the purpose of hooka smoking and no other area or portion of premise shall be used by the customers of the petitioner for smoking hooka.

¶55

(b) Under the guise of inspection, the respondent-jurisdictional police shall not harass the petitioner. However, it does not deter them from inspecting the premise at periodical intervals with notice to the petitioner, if necessary.

¶56

7. In that view of the matter, instant petition is disposed of by imposing the conditions in the order dated 03.09.2015 passed in W.P.No.8140/2017 and also the additional conditions as noted above. Respondents are hereby directed not to interfere with the legal activities of petitioner. However, liberty as indicated hereinabove would be available to the competent authorities to proceed in accordance with law, if any illegal activities are found in the premises of petitioner.

¶57

Ordered accordingly."

¶58

¶59

NC: 2024:KHC:904 WP No. 624 of 2024

¶60

In the light of the issue standing covered by the

¶61

judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench and the facts being undisputed, the petition stands disposed on the same terms.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 141

M/S Tribal Cafe v. Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Tribal Cafe v. Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen R Vs Kum Thvishikka

Mr v Vinay Kumar Vs Balkrishna Livestock Breeders Pvt. Ltd.

Mr Koshy Varghese Vs Union of India

All India Hdpe/Pp Woven Fabric Manufactures Assocation Vs the Secretary

Smt S Deepa Vs the Authorized Officer(Ceo)

Sri B Narayanaswamy Vs Punjab National Bank